phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | animal metacognition (uncertainty monitoring)— “A growing literature considers whether animals have capacities that are akin to human metacognition (i. e., humans’ capacity to monitor their states of uncertainty and knowing).” | |
| claim-type | critique— “The associative descriptions in the animal-metacognition literature fail to encompass important phenomena.” | |
| method — evidence | — “The present article summarizes the empirical and theoretical situation regarding these associative models and descriptions of animal-metacognition phenomena.” | |
| object of study — evidence | — “The authors summarize the empirical and theoretical situation regarding these associative descriptions.” | |
| mechanism | When deferred feedback camouflages the task's reinforcement structure, the animal builds its own subjective decisional framework and responds uncertain to whatever is near its own subjective breakpoint, not the task's objective one— “Absent access to the task’s associative structure, the animal constructed his own subjective decisional framework based on subjective difficulty, or uncertainty, or even metacognition.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Uncertainty responses draw on executive attention and working memory, which is why occupying those resources with a concurrent task selectively degrades them while leaving stimulus-driven perceptual classification intact— “This dissociation suggests that the uncertainty response is a higher-level, decisional response that is particularly dependent on working memory and attentional resources.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | In Hampton's task no memory-relevant stimulus is present at choice time, so the animal must itself initiate and restrict a search of memory for a strong trace — an operation with no associative cue to react to— “What the animal must do is use those response icons to cue a memory search for a hot or recent trace.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | Casting every performance as a register of activation strengths updated by reinforcement artificially equates psychologically different performances, which is what empties the label 'associative' of content— “Indeed, forcing all performances onto this structure artificially equates them—really, this is what you want to do and what you have to do if you want to label them all associative.” | mechanisms[3] |
| mechanism | The uncertainty response is designed to carry no reward of its own, so choosing it cannot be explained by direct reinforcement of that response— “It would never bring any direct reward or other consequence.” | mechanisms[4] |
| mechanism | In the memory task the response icons carry no trace-strength information, so there is nothing on the screen for an association to attach to - the animal must initiate its own search— “In this case, there are no memory-relevant stimuli on the scene. There is nothing to cue the animal’s response to some stimulus’s trace hotness.” | mechanisms[5] |
| mechanism | The search must also be restricted to the right memory locations, and nothing in the display can tell the animal how to do that— “And nothing on the response screen can cue the macaque associatively to conduct this search of memory or to restrict that search to the required set of memory locations, or on how to judge when a remembered item has been retrieved or has not been retrieved.” | mechanisms[6] |
| mechanism | The associative models work by mapping every performance onto one abstract register of activations updated by reinforcement, which is precisely what makes them unable to tell performances apart— “Indeed, forcing all performances onto this structure artificially equates them—really, this is what you want to do and what you have to do if you want to label them all associative.” | mechanisms[7] |
| mechanism | The reductio: the same formalism works with a register of fully conscious metacognitive states updated by reinforcement, which shows the formalism settles nothing— “In this way, we could claim mathematically and formally that animals learn associatively through reinforcement to use fully conscious metacognitive states. This claim is useless.” | mechanisms[8] |
| mechanism | The all-or-none framing is itself the error: uncertainty monitoring may exist in graded stages without the whole human package— “It can acknowledge that a capacity like metacognition may not be all or none, and that animals might have a basic uncertainty-monitoring system without having bought all the apps of human metacognition, like consciousness, self-awareness, and even self-loathing from cognitive failure and indecision.” | mechanisms[9] |
| contradicts | Le Pelley (2012), associative-learning model of animal metacognition— “This poor fit by itself sharply undermines the descriptive value of Le Pelley’s associative-learning model in this case.” | claim_relations[0] |
| contradicts | Jozefowiez et al. (2009a)— “For the same reason, Jozefowiez et al. (2009a) are incorrect when they claim that the underlying processes are exactly the same whether a triggering stimulus is on the screen or the animal must initiate its own targeted search for active memory traces.” | claim_relations[1] |
| builds-on | Hampton (2001), macaque metamemory studies— “The results in Smith et al. (in press) also offer a new perspective on Hampton’s (2001) metamemory studies.” | claim_relations[2] |
| critiques | associative models of animal uncertainty responses (Jozefowiez et al., Le Pelley, Staddon et al.)— “For the same reason, Jozefowiez et al. (2009a) are incorrect when they claim that the underlying processes are exactly the same whether a triggering stimulus is on the screen or the animal must initiate its own targeted search for active memory traces.” | claim_relations[3] |
| critiques | strict application of Morgan's canon in comparative psychology— “Those models reflect an ultimately strict adherence to Morgan’s (1906) Canon, which even Morgan did not intend and which many comparative-cognition researchers do not accept now.” | claim_relations[4] |
| supports | Hampton (2001) and the memory-monitoring evidence for macaque metacognition— “Therefore, viewed from all these perspectives, the performances observed in Hampton (2001) cannot properly be considered to be based on associative learning, and overlooking this point is a significant error.” | claim_relations[5] |
| supports | Metcalfe's operational benchmark of stimulus absence— “Moreover, Metcalfe (2008) made stimulus absence in metacognitive tasks a crucial benchmark in her operational definition of animal metacognition.” | claim_relations[6] |
| sense | associative - the specific sense: responding cued by a present stimulus or trained by reinforcement contingencies— “That is, those performances might have low-level and non-metacognitive bases if animals’ uncertainty responses were really cued by stimuli or conditioned/trained by reinforcement contingencies.” | senses[0] |
| sense | associative - the stretched sense: anything expressible as a register of activations updated by reward, which covers everything and therefore distinguishes nothing— “Unfortunately, then the associative label becomes meaningless, because one can no longer make distinctions among performances that may be highly distinctive theoretically and psychologically.” | senses[1] |
| sense | the task - with trace-relevant stimuli present (matching-to-sample): an associative account applies— “In these tasks, there are stimuli on the scene at the moment of behavioral choice that are memory or trace-strength relevant.” | senses[2] |
| sense | the task - with memory-neutral response icons (Hampton): nothing is present to be associated with, so the same account does not carry over— “However, Hampton’s methodology is strikingly different. His macaques, after observing the sample and waiting through the retention interval, are presented with two abstract response icons that have no trace-strength relevance.” | senses[3] |
| sense | metacognition - as all-or-none: the Yes/No framing the paper says the dichotomy itself may be wrong for the field's goal— “Even in Le Pelley’s (2012) title—Metacognitive Monkeys or Associative Animals…—he seems to recommend a Yes or No answer to the question of animal metacognition, when that dichotomy could be wrong for the field’s theoretical goal.” | senses[4] |
| sense | metacognition - as graded: a basic uncertainty-monitoring system without consciousness or self-awareness attached— “It can acknowledge that a capacity like metacognition may not be all or none, and that animals might have a basic uncertainty-monitoring system without having bought all the apps of human metacognition, like consciousness, self-awareness, and even self-loathing from cognitive failure and indecision.” | senses[5] |
| control | the Sparse-Uncertain-Dense task interleaved with a Sparse-Middle-Dense task for the capuchin monkeys — held — rules out the monkeys learning a fixed response to the uncertain condition - interleaving a task where the middle option is not uncertainty keeps the two from being solved as one— “The Sparse-Uncertain-Dense task for capuchin monkeys was interleaved with a Sparse-Middle-Dense task.” | controls[0] |
| differs in | Jozefowiez et al. (2009a) — whether the trigger is present or must be found: JOZEFOWIEZ ET AL. ARE INCORRECT WHEN THEY CLAIM THAT THE UNDERLYING PROCESSES ARE EXACTLY THE SAME WHETHER A TRIGGERING STIMULUS IS ON THE SCREEN OR THE ANIMAL MUST INITIATE ITS OWN TARGETED SEARCH FOR ACTIVE MEMORY TRACES— “For the same reason, Jozefowiez et al. (2009a) are incorrect when they claim that the underlying processes are exactly the same whether a triggering stimulus is on the screen or the animal must initiate its own targeted search for active memory traces.” | claim_relations[1] |
| differs in | associative models of animal uncertainty responses (Jozefowiez et al., Le Pelley, Staddon et al.) — the same parameter as item 1 - a triggering stimulus ON THE SCREEN against the animal having to INITIATE ITS OWN TARGETED SEARCH FOR ACTIVE MEMORY TRACES— “For the same reason, Jozefowiez et al. (2009a) are incorrect when they claim that the underlying processes are exactly the same whether a triggering stimulus is on the screen or the animal must initiate its own targeted search for active memory traces.” | claim_relations[3] |
| differs in | strict application of Morgan's canon in comparative psychology — how strictly the canon is applied: THOSE MODELS REFLECT AN ULTIMATELY STRICT ADHERENCE TO MORGAN'S (1906) CANON, WHICH EVEN MORGAN DID NOT INTEND AND WHICH MANY COMPARATIVE-COGNITION RESEARCHERS DO NOT ACCEPT NOW— “Those models reflect an ultimately strict adherence to Morgan’s (1906) Canon, which even Morgan did not intend and which many comparative-cognition researchers do not accept now.” | claim_relations[4] |
| audit | uncertainty response —operationalised-as→ uncertainty monitoring — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the uncertainty response is shown to be more than a middle category, with monitoring mediated by a distinct network; operationalised-as is loose. | concept_edges[0] |
| audit | executive —causes→ uncertainty response — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span says UR processes are executive; causes is loose. | concept_edges[4] |
| weight | executive —causes→ uncertainty response — 0.9 | concept_edges[4] |
| audit | metacognition —part-of→ declarative — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span links metacognition to the declarative system; part-of is loose. | concept_edges[7] |
| weight | metacognition —part-of→ declarative — 0.9 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[7] |
| edge | self-awareness —distinct-from→ uncertainty monitoring Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[8] |
| edge | reinforcement —causes→ registers Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[9] |
| audit | phylogenetic —causes→ metacognition — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span says phylogeny probably gave metacognition in stages; causes states a probability. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[10] |
| weight | phylogenetic —causes→ metacognition — 0.8 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[10] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the critique of the newest models: THERE HAS NOT BEEN TIME TO ADDRESS IT YET Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the positive interpretation: ONE NEED NOT ATTRIBUTE FULL, CONSCIOUS, SELF-IMBUED METACOGNITION TO MACAQUES EVEN IF ONE ADOPTS THIS INFORMATION-SEEKING HYPOTHESIS Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — the verdict on that model: IT IS PRESENTLY DIFFICULT TO JUDGE THE MODEL'S PRAGMATIC SUCCESS Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — the nature of the whole dispute: THESE EMPIRICAL RESULTS ARE NOT DISPUTED - the disagreement is interpretive, so there is no discrepant measurement to find Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| for which use | limitation — any transfer of the human evidence for conscious uncertainty: MACAQUES HAVE ALSO SHOWN THIS PATTERN REPEATEDLY, THOUGH THEY REPORT NOTHING Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the paper's own conclusion, read exactly: higher-level, cognitive, deliberate and decisional are asserted; POSSIBLY METACOGNITIVE AND CONSCIOUS is hedged Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — the standing of the opposing programme: describing the performances in low-level associative terms is AN IMPORTANT GOAL IF ACHIEVABLE Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| replication | contested | |
| limitation | The authors concede that not all of the models they criticise have had a fair opportunity to address the newest phenomenon. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | They hedge their own positive interpretation: information-seeking need not imply full conscious metacognition. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | They acknowledge they cannot presently settle whether one criticised model succeeds in practice. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The empirical results themselves are not in dispute - the whole disagreement is over interpretation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| limitation | The animals report nothing, so the human evidence for conscious uncertainty has no counterpart in the animal case Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| limitation | The paper's own positive claim is hedged to possibly-metacognitive rather than metacognitive Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| limitation | The critique is of a specific class of models, which the authors accept would be a legitimate goal if it could be made to work Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | Le Pelley's associative-learning model never produces anything like the uncertainty-response pattern the macaques showed. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | At its best fit the associative model mispredicts each of 120 data points by .10 on average. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | A non-associative uncertainty model fits the same data more than three times more closely, with an AAD of .03. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | The better-fitting cognitive model is also the more parsimonious one, using 3 free parameters against the associative model's 5. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | The associative model fits best only by giving up the crucial result: the macaque's asymmetric centering of uncertainty responses at Level 14. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | Capuchin monkeys essentially did not use the uncertainty response, even though they received immediate feedback after every trial. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | A concurrent memory load selectively suppressed macaques' uncertainty responses while leaving their Sparse, Middle and Dense perceptual responses largely intact. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | Pigeons do not express any memory-monitoring capacity. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | Pigeons' uncertainty-response rate stays flat across retention intervals, though they remember less after longer delays. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | With the added serial-position parameters, Le Pelley's associative model would have nine free parameters. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| finding | The authors hold that Le Pelley's published simulations must be discounted because they misstate a crucial aspect of Hampton's method. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[11] |
| finding | With the delay interval controlled, macaques made far more uncertainty responses on blank trials. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[12] |
| finding | Monkeys defended the same criterion of memory strength in two separate studies, a convergence across laboratories, animals and methods. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[13] |
| finding | The authors argue that the associative models reflect a strict adherence to Morgan's Canon that even Morgan did not intend. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[14] |
| finding | animals show uncertainty responses where no cuing stimulus is present, on first trials, and without feedback Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[15] |
| finding | chimpanzees checked the container before naming only on trials where they had not seen its contents Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[16] |
| finding | the empirical pattern is agreed by both sides; only its interpretation is disputed Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[17] |
| finding | a broad enough associative label can no longer separate performances that differ psychologically Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[18] |
| finding | the claim implies any information processing can be lumped under 'associative', which makes the term theoretically useless Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[19] |
| quantity | r = 0.838 — correlation between the proportion of trials the macaque declined and the distance of the trial level from his own subjective decisional breakpoint Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | .10 — best-case average absolute deviation of the associative-learning model per data point Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | .03 — average absolute deviation of the non-associative uncertainty model on the same data Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | about .30 — per-data-point error of the associative model when constrained to the UR fulcrum of 14 that the real macaque showed Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 5% — error of prediction of the earlier signal-detection associative model between predicted and observed response proportions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | 7% — average per-stimulus-level misprediction of the uncertainty response by that associative model across levels 1-31 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | 23% ... 97% — macaque Murph's uncertainty-response rate at Level 9 against his accuracy on those same trials, showing URs uncoupled from reinforcement Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| quantity | 19% ... 22% — the same macaque's uncertainty-response rate at Level 20 against his accuracy there, far below chance yet declined less often than the easy level Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[7] |
| quantity | 14 and 0.12 — the real macaque's position in the simulation space (UR fulcrum, mean UR rate), which the associative model's runs never reach Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[8] |
| quantity | 90 s from 20s — the penalty timeout increase used to raise associative pressure on capuchins to adopt the uncertainty response Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[9] |
| quantity | five of six — capuchin monkeys who still failed to use the uncertainty response adaptively even after the timeout was quadrupled Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[10] |
| quantity | 10% — the constant error rate macaques maintained as memory lists lengthened, by declining more tests Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[11] |
| quantity | one of five — capuchins who searched before reaching more often on unseen-hiding trials in the food-concealment paradigm Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[12] |
| quantity | 41-step continuum — the density scale along which stimuli are classified sparse or dense Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[13] |
| quantity | Level 21 — the exact breakpoint, never presented, around which the uncertainty response should cluster Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[14] |
| variable | concurrent working-memory load (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[1] |
| variable | penalty timeout (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| variable | retention interval (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[3] |
| definition | metacognition Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | “Middle” response Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | Average Absolute Deviation (AAD) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | fulcrum point of URs Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | subjective difficulty Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[5] |
| definition | uncertainty response Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[6] |
| definition | Delayed-Matching-to-Sample Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[7] |
| key-terms | metacognition, uncertainty response, associative, uncertainty monitoring, trace strength, Delayed-Matching-to-Sample, reinforcement, registers, executive, declarative, self-awareness, operational definition, phylogenetic, comparative psychology |
| concept | metacognition — not defined in this paper's own words; the capacity to monitor and control one's own cognitive processes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| correlation r | as written: a strong relationship ... ( r = 0.838) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| goodness-of-fit measure AAD | as written: Average Absolute Deviation (AAD) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| model fitting | as written: We also fit these runs of the model Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| signal detection theory model | as written: an associative model based in signal-detection theory Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| error of prediction | as written: The error of prediction between predicted and observed response proportions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824